Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

It's unreasonable to constantly call people out for it when the fact that it's an opinion is obvious. Obviously you won't "get over it" but it's my opinion that you should.

I haven't read pianoloverus's posts here, though I think it odd that he continues to post in a thread which doesn't really concern him. It is not about Liszt after all, it is just about a tiny old man wanting to get his own way, the self-appointed constable of PW. How many threads wherein this member just seems to make a fetish of nitpicking?

Sorry that Josh's topic has been so damned by someone who spends far too much time here, and therefore unable to confine himself to topics wherein he might otherwise have something of relevance to tell us.

Once again: I personally feel Il lamento one of Liszt's GREATEST compositions, I don't care what anyone else thinks, it is miraculous -time literally seems to stand still- there is simply no way that I can convey here what it has meant to me.

But someone had to pisss on my parade, remove the mystery, paint me as a fool, and stupidly whine that I didn't specify that -after all- it was only an opinion.

pianoloverus
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/29/01
Posts: 19841
Loc: New York City

I think that when it's obvious that a statement is an opinion, it's more important to explicitly state it's an opinion if one wants to avoid the appearance of arrogance. Even more so if the opinion is different from most others.

You've made your point. Now please let it go. It's ok to "agree to disagree"-- and yes, that is my opinion.

I believe Sibelius and Mahler agreed to disagree on the nature of the symphony (Mahler: The symphony is like the world - it must encompass everything! Sibelius retorted: Nein, no, no! My symphonies are like pure spring water - they cleanse the human soul! OK, that wasn´t quite what they said, but you get the gist), and that´s why they´re among the greatest symphonists of all time, and certainly the 20th century´s greatest.

IMO of course .

_________________________
"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."

I believe Sibelius and Mahler agreed to disagree on the nature of the symphony (Mahler: The symphony is like the world - it must encompass everything! Sibelius retorted: Nein, no, no! My symphonies are like pure spring water - they cleanse the human soul!

That is a well known -and wonderful- anecdote, if no one is really sure what was said. Interestingly, if I am not mistaken, when Mahler and Sibelius had that encounter they had both written their first three symphonies. (Their respective 3rds are terrific.)

I don't think Elgar ever heard any of the Mahler symphonies -they were never performed in England, though Mahler conducted the 'Enigma Variations' as did Rachmaninov- but his 2nd Symphony is far closer to the Mahler model than Sibelius.

This is rather ridiculous. Josh's thread ran beautifully -some terrific contributions from many members here- for 8 pages before pianoloverus even bothered to contribute, and that only because of a perceived transgression on my part.

Little did I know that an innocent love and enthusiasm for such an underrated piece of Liszt would generate such vitriol. I gave my reasons for why I feel it is not played as often as it should, but that seems to have been overlooked in an avalanche of accusations of opinion masquerading as fact. Then of course the member above had to make it personal, that was what really stung.

This thread was started for members here who admire Liszt's music, and I thought that my contributions would be understood in that context.

If we might get back on track, here is a fine performance of Liszt's BACH. When I was in Boston several weeks ago visiting with an old uni friend (and fellow organist), he -after many drinks- expressed disgust at this piece. Some things never change, we disagreed back then too!

I haven´t looked at all the posts, but if it hasn´t been mentioned already, there´s a recent recording of Liszt´s B minor Sonata played on the organ: all the notes of the piano part, nothing added, nothing taken away as far as I could tell. And it sounds amazingly good.

Now, we need someone to play it on the harp, or marimba, or xylophone, or...

_________________________
"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."

France Clidat has become one of my favourite Liszt pianists. There aren't many of her recordings on YouTube, but for those who use it, she recorded quite a bit of Liszt's piano music, which is all available on Spotify:

I haven´t looked at all the posts, but if it hasn´t been mentioned already

It hasn't!

Quote:

there´s a recent recording of Liszt´s B minor Sonata played on the organ: all the notes of the piano part, nothing added, nothing taken away as far as I could tell. And it sounds amazingly good.

I have shied away from listening to that, but upon your recommendation perhaps I'll give it a try.

Never been a big fan of organ transcriptions (two major exceptions: the Walton coronation marches which feel tailor made for the organ ) partly because there is so much glorious music written expressly for the king of instruments.

Of course I can be inconsistent. I LOVE piano transcriptions, and the organ counterparts were frequently written for the same reason: to disseminate the music.

I think I might, possibly, have already posted this one here before, but I will do it again because I just love it so much!

I love it too...it's a perfect conclusion to a great cycle of piano music.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Gunnar Johansen is a great Liszt pianist i've discovered recently. He was one of the first pianists who attempted to record all of Liszt's piano music (he ended with 51 LP's worth), and this was when delving deep into Liszt's output was not exactly a common occurence. Not only did he play a lot of Liszt, i've found many of his recordings to be first rate, too. Here are some examples:

Ad Nos Fantasy and Fugue (start of video, but there are some delightful extras afterward too).

Liszt's Funeral Odes are some of his most profound works and some personal favourites of mine. They were written during one of the most remarkable compositional periods in his life (1860 - 1866), in which he wrote/completed final versions of such notable works as the Zwei Konzertetüden, Berceuse, Deux légendes, Variations on a theme from Weinen, Klagen, Sorgen, Zagen, Rhapsodie espagnole, Die Lorelei, fantasies on Gounod, Beethoven Symphony Transcrptions, Deux épisodes d'apres le Faust de Lenau (including the first Mephisto Waltz), the choral ending to the Faust Symphony, Psalm's 13, 23, 137, and perhaps his ultimate masterpiece, Christus (and more). This was also a very difficult time in his life; his two children died in a span of around 3 years (which is, I believe, the inspiration for the odes), he and his music were basically driven out of Weimar, and his desired marriage was thwarted by those darn things we call politics. Luckily for us these terrible times for him have resulted in great works of art for us to witness!

Ad Nos Fantasy and Fugue (start of video, but there are some delightful extras afterward too).

What an INSANELY great piece of music, Liszt at his grandest! Johansen faithfully plays the Busoni transcription. (I followed with score.)

I have often wondered why Liszt never arranged it for solo piano; certainly he would have played through it on the piano. Liszt had no training as an organist and could not play the pedals, but all he managed was a rather perfunctory arrangement for piano four hands. Pace Leslie Howard, it is of little interest, and even less imagination.

Saint-Saëns -no slouch when it came to writing for the organ- proclaimed the Ad nos the most extraordinary work for the organ since Bach. Not true- that honour (and no IMO, thank-you) goes to Franck's greatest organ works. But S-S disliked Franck, surely a combination of personality conflict and misapprehension of the music.

How wrong he was. S-S, that most facile of composers, pales in comparison to Franck. Nothing he wrote matches the mature music of Franck, if he does come close on occasion.

For all that, nothing approaches a performance of the Ad nos on the organ. It is an unbelievably majestic experience, and when I first heard it played at St. Paul's Cathedral in London, I knew I wanted to be an organist.

Ad Nos Fantasy and Fugue (start of video, but there are some delightful extras afterward too).

Pace Leslie Howard, it is of little interest, and even less imagination.

I listened to this recently and agree. I found it rather bland, and it's certainly no match for the Busoni. It's unusual, too, Liszt usually being so good as a transcriber and there's no reason for him to not have given this work his best. Maybe he was just having a bad day?

It's unusual, too, Liszt usually being so good as a transcriber and there's no reason for him to not have given this work his best. Maybe he was just having a bad day?

Who knows, Josh. Considering Liszt's appetite for transcribing -and several times he made a transcription, only to later realize he had done it earlier- I have actually lost sleep wondering why he had so little interest in one of his greatest compositions.

At least as far as his resulting transcription goes. I believe in his later years he actually called the Ad Nos one of his "least bad" compositions, or something like that. Interestingly Leslie Howard in his liner notes wrote that "The score of the work shows how carefully Liszt sought to make an effective duet version." Puzzling, overall. Regardless, we shall be forever thankful for Busoni! I can't imagine it being done better.

Interestingly Leslie Howard in his liner notes wrote that "The score of the work shows how carefully Liszt sought to make an effective duet version."

But then Howard goes on to write that there are many passages in which all the material is redistributed about the four hands... which seems to me a bit of an overstatement. The end result doesn't particularly illuminate anything new about the original, and without access to the score, one might indeed conclude that the 'secondo' is in fact merely doubling the pedal line, a rather uncomfortable issue for Howard.

At this point we could honestly enquire: well then, why didn't Liszt go all the way and arrange it for two pianos? He certainly wasn't adverse to doing so -very successfully- with his symphonic poems.

In what way? I'm no expert on the work and don't know the ins and outs of the organ/organ composition so it would be interesting to hear both your opinions.

Frustrating in that as Liszt had no formal training on the organ, there are several passages wherein the writing for the instrument is less than idiomatic. In the manual parts, Liszt sometimes seems flummoxed by the lack of a sustaining pedal, and then some of the pedal parts border the impossible. (Most organists edit them in varying degrees.)

It is interesting to compare with the organ sonata by Liszt's student Julius Reubke. There the pedal writing is seamlessly integrated with the manuals, and the piece never sounds like piano music transferred to the organ. (I have also never seen it transcribed for piano.)

But as much as I love the Reubke sonata (and it is a favourite with all but the most snobbish organists), overall it doesn't quite climb that Lisztian Parnassus of kinetic energy, mysticism, and spellbinding grandeur.

I have to confess I am not really a Lisztophile, (I overall prefer Chopin). But only Liszt could have created the Mephisto Waltz, and the Hungarian Rhapsodies. And every instinct tells me there has only been one 'perfect' interpreter of Liszt - Gyorgy Cziffra. His CDs take pride of place in my collection, along with Michelangeli's Debussy, and Elisabeth Schwarzkopf's Songs of Richard Strauss.

Apart from the phenomenal virtuosity Cziffra had at his command, he has, for me, the perfect blend of explosive bravura and melting lyricism that this music demands. Titanic!

I am not a performer, but a composer. But I have penned a very, very virtuosic work for piano, written in an impressionist/romantic style. For anyone interested you will find the work, Abyss, in the Composers Lounge Forum, and on youtube - marknicol7. Abyss is part of a 7-piece set, the 5th. of which is very Chopinesque. Any help with editing would be much appreciated, for, as things stand, 7 out of 10 pianists have told me that Abyss is unplayable, or almost.